Apparently.
People are smoking tobacco outside, in the open air that is also being shared by exhaust fumes from numerous sources, only because some people that didn't like the smell were able to get the highly financed junk scientists to convince the corruptible and gullible lawmakers to do it.
Reminds you of "Reefer Madness", doesn't it?
And remember, in many, if not most, public places, you still can't drink alcohol (a legal drug) outside in the open air, even though it emits no unhalable by-product.
So, there is precedent for this ... and nobody seemed to be upset about it. Therefore, this is a natural progression. When they came for the marijuana and alcohol users I didn't speak because I didn't use marijuana or alcohol, etc, etc. I'm sure you know this theory. Eventually your drug of choice is going to come onto the radar. Frankly, i'm surprised it took this long for tobacco.
But heck, I'm a reasonable gal, so I'll go with your idea of "recreational drugs" and suggest that the use of tobacco in an establishment created for the use of alcohol or caffeine shouldn't be a problem, should it? It solves the problem of tobacco use outside, doesn't it?
Of course. No arguement here.
But I'll take it even a step further, let all the business owners make the decision. WOW, that's such a novel idea, isn't it?
Maybe. Some might argue that OSHA regulations should be done away with, and if the workers don't like the conditions they could just quit. Some might argue that if offices aren't wheelchair-accessible, then disabled persons should just find another job. If your boss is sexually harassing you, quit, and find another job. Business should be able to create whatever work environments they want.
I'm not entirely sure I agree with doing away with all workplace regulations.
Now, if the business is specifically designated as a "Place for people to use and enjoy recreational drugs", I agree with you 100%. It should be up to them whether they wish to engage in that business.
I never mentioned OSHA regs or ADA regs.
But since you brought up OSHA, were you aware they were sued by one of the Anti-smoker organizations to set a zero tolerance level for second hand smoke? The antis wanted OSHA regs for employee exposure - but they wanted a zero level and OSHA said it couldn't. I don't remember all the specifics, and don't have the document at my fingertips, BUT, the gist was had OSHA set levels for exposure all smoking bans enacted for "employee safety" would be tossed out - because even the smokiest bar would not reach even a minimum level.
The antis weren't happy and sued - but finally realized they were sunk if OSHA did set a reg - so they dropped the lawsuit.